ELF10 report: Teaching productive phonological accommodation in monolingual classes


This is one of a series of short guest posts written by researchers who presented their work at the 10th annual ELF conference in June 2017.

The following post was contributed by Christie Heike. You can read a short biography of Christie and her work below.

Right on Target: Teaching Productive Phonological Accommodation in Monolingual Classes

Jenkins (2000, 2002) proposed that learners who are preparing to engage in English as a lingua franca (ELF) need to be taught not only how to pronounce specific features, but also how to accommodate phonologically – that is, how to make adjustments to their pronunciation where they receive signals from their interlocutors that their pronunciation is causing problems for intelligibility. In examining how phonological accommodation manifests itself in ELF situations, Jenkins observed that where speakers from different L1 backgrounds are motivated by a desire to be intelligible to one another, they will adjust their pronunciation of core features toward their only shared resource: target-like pronunciation.

Therefore, Jenkins proposed that the teaching of productive phonological accommodation in multilingual classes should be a relatively straightforward process. All work on phonological accommodation should be prefaced by instruction and controlled practice of core features to ensure that learners have these features in their productive repertoires. After that, the key element for teaching accommodation in multilingual classes is to create situations in which learners can communicate with a classmate from another first language background. Preferably this should take place in information exchange tasks involving a measurable outcome (e.g. learner-learner dictation, describe-and-draw tasks, giving directions, information gap activities), since Jenkins found that this increases the saliency of intelligibility and thus encourages the use of accommodation. This allows learners to notice for themselves where their pronunciation has caused problems for intelligibility and gives them the chance to practice replacing problematic pronunciation with more target-like pronunciation.

But what do we do with largely monolingual groups, in which most or all of the learners come from the same linguistic background?

In classes like this, it is patently impossible to arrange the learners into pairs or groups in which each learner comes from a different first language background. And Jenkins observed that when learners from the same L1 background engage in these same communicative tasks, they converge not on more target-like pronunciation, but rather on their common L1-influenced pronunciation.

While this actually does increase their intelligibility and allow them to complete the task successfully, it is undesirable for ELF-oriented teaching for two reasons: First, it does not give learners practice in the kind of accommodation they will actually need to engage in as speakers in ELF situations. Second, it actually undermines pronunciation teaching in that it reinforces the learners’ L1-influenced accent, leading them away from the development of more target-like pronunciation of core features. Therefore, the parameters that lead to successful accommodation practice in multilingual classes will not lead to success in monolingual ones.

So how can we give learners in monolingual learning groups practice in the kind of phonological accommodation they need to be able to engage in in actual ELF talk?

To date, very few solutions have been proposed to this problem. One solution, proposed by Walker (2005, 2010), involves the use of learner recordings. In many ways, this task is similar to the tasks Jenkins recommends for multilingual classes: it is prefaced by instruction and practice, it involves learner speaking to learner, and it features a task with a measurable outcome. However, the key parameter here seems to be a focus on a limited set of features. Walker posits the idea that by focusing on a limited set of features in which learners have received instruction and practice, we can trust them to converge on target-like pronunciation rather than L1-influenced pronunciation despite the fact that they are working in monolingual groups (Walker 2005: 554).

As part of my doctoral research project on integrating an ELF orientation into tertiary-level practical English courses, I hypothesized that this key principle – constructing tasks in such a way that they focus learners’ attention on a limited set of features – might allow teachers to use other kinds of tasks that would encourage learners from monolingual learning groups to practice adjusting their pronunciation toward the target in response to peer feedback. I built several such tasks into a pilot course held at the Technical University of Kaiserslautern in 2013.

In analyzing the transcripts of these tasks, I found that, where the students’ attention was drawn to a specific set of pronunciation features both by previous instruction and by the task parameters, students did in fact adjust their pronunciation toward more target-like pronunciation despite working in monolingual groups. This often took the form of students negotiating together the target-like pronunciation of pronunciation features targeted by that lesson.

For example, in a twist on the card game Old Maid (Maurer Smolder 2012: 25), students had to find pairs of words featuring the same sound from a set of six consonant sounds that comprised the focus of the lesson.

This led to a lot of discussion within the groups as the students tried to decide which words constituted a pair and which did not. In considering whether the words peas and beans could be a pair, one group was able to converge on a more target-like pronunciation of the word-final /z/ in both words.

In other tasks, task parameters also led students to adjust their pronunciation toward the target in response to requests for confirmation from other students. This happened particularly where tasks were constructed around minimal pairs, such as during the game Pronunciation Round-up in a lesson on voicing final voiced consonants (Maurer Smolder 2012: 38).

It would appear, then, that communicative pronunciation tasks designed around a limited set of features in which learners have had previous instruction and practice can facilitate practice in adjusting pronunciation toward the target in response to peer feedback, even in monolingual learning groups.

While it is in some ways problematic to call this type of adjustment accommodation in the full sense of the term, it nevertheless provides learners with practice in important pre-requisite skills for the kind of phonological accommodation they will need to engage in in actual ELF interactions.


Jenkins, Jennifer (2000) The Phonology of English as an International Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Jenkins, Jennifer (2002) A sociolinguistically based, empirically researched pronunciation syllabus for EIL. Applied Linguistics 23/1, 83-103.

Maurer Smolder, Christina (2012) Be Understood! A pronunciation resource for every classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Walker, Robin (2005) Using student-produced recordings with monolingual groups to provide effective, individualized pronunciation practice. TESOL Quarterly 39/3, 535-542.

Walker, Robin (2010) Teaching the Pronunciation of English as a Lingua Franca. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

About the author: Christie Heike

Christie Heike is a lecturer at the Europe-University of Flensburg in Germany, where she received her Master of Education in English and music in 2011. She is currently working on her dissertation, entitled “Reevaluating the Teaching of English for International Communication”. Her study focuses on how insights from ELF research might be applied to practical English courses at the tertiary level in order to better prepare students for using English as a lingua franca. In addition to her research, she also teaches in the English department in the areas of linguistics and teacher education.


ELF10 report: What happens when ELF users try to understand each other’s accents?


This is one of a series of short guest posts written by researchers who presented their work at the 10th annual ELF conference in June 2017.

The following post was contributed by Veronika Thir. You can read a short biography of Veronika and her work at the end of the post.

What happens when ELF users try to understand each other’s accents?

Language teachers are often painfully aware of the limited time they have in the classroom to equip their learners with what they need for international communication. Therefore, they are always interested in knowing what aspect of language (use) they should focus on most in their lessons. Grammar? Vocabulary? Pronunciation? Communication strategies?

In the past, some claims have been made that pronunciation seems to be a particularly serious ‘problem area’ for users of ELF in that it turned out to be the major source of communication problems in some studies (Jenkins 2000, Deterding 2013). Accordingly, calls have been made for a stronger focus on pronunciation in the ELT classroom. However, what has often been overlooked is that a couple of other studies (e.g. Mauranen (2006), Pitzl (2010) or Kaur (2011)) did not actually find pronunciation to be a serious problem for mutual understanding in ELF communication. It seems that pronunciation might sometimes be responsible for the vast majority of communication problems in ELF talk, while sometimes, it is not much of a problem at all. But how can we explain this variable role of pronunciation for successful ELF communication?

One possible explanation is the availability of co-text and context in certain situations. If we process each other’s pronunciation to recognize words in the stream of speech, we do not only draw on the sounds we hear (‘bottom-up’ processing). We also use information from the linguistic co-text and the extra-linguistic context to make sense of what we hear (‘top-down’ processing).[1]

Let me provide an example: if we hear someone saying “I [s]ink this is a nice idea”, we will most probably not assume that the person intends to say ‘sink’ but that they mean ‘think’, because the lexical and syntactic co-text do not support our interpretation of ‘sink’. Possibly, the situational context will also provide us with certain cues that lead us to prefer ‘think’ over ‘sink’ in our interpretation. We might also consider our knowledge of the speaker (e.g. that they often replace ‘th’ with ‘s’) and use this information to interpret what they say, and conclude that ‘think’ is the intended word.

What I’m getting at is that both co-text and context can supply the listener with cues that might help them to compensate for ambiguities in the acoustic signal. This is why Brown (1989) called context “a powerful disambiguator“. If co-textual and/or contextual cues are sparse or absent, a certain accent might quickly become much more of a problem than it would have been otherwise.

The interesting thing is that we do not yet really know how much of an impact co-textual and contextual cues have on the intelligibility of pronunciation in ELF communication. Jennifer Jenkins (2000) observed that ELF users sometimes seem to be unable to profit from such cues when trying to understand one another. However, other ELF researchers have suggested that co-text and context might very well be an important additional source of information for ELF listeners in understanding their interlocutor’s accent (Deterding (2012), Luchini & Kennedy (2013), Osimk (2009)).

My doctoral research aims to shed more light on the role of co-textual and contextual cues when ELF users process each other’s accents. To this end, I recently carried out a pilot study, part of which I presented at ELF10. 

What did I do?

I gathered data from 2 pairs of ELF speakers[2] who completed two communicative tasks under different conditions: the experimental condition, which involved the presence of a certain ‘schematic’ context which participants were able to draw on in order to make sense of their interlocutor’s speech, and the control condition, in which no such context was available.

Each pair completed one of the two tasks (map-task and spot-the-difference task) under the experimental condition and one task under the control condition. All interactions were video-recorded and each participant re-watched the video of the interactions they had taken part in together with me in order to help me identify all instances of phonological intelligibility problems in the data and clarify their sources. I then analysed each instance qualitatively, in particular with regard to the presence or absence of schematic or visual context and linguistic co-text.

What did I find?

So here are the most important observations I was able to make regarding the 2 pairs of ELF speakers I examined:

  • The ELF speakers in this study did use co-textual and contextual cues in understanding each other’s accents. They did so not only when hearing something for the first time, but also when trying to resolve intelligibility problems and negotiating meaning. Apart from linguistic co-text, visual context (e.g. in the form of the map in front of them, or their partner’s body language) and verbal cues evoking part of a relevant schema (e.g. “the place with animals” for ‘zoo’) turned out to be helpful in resolving comprehension difficulties.
  • Most of the time they were used, co-textual and contextual cues turned out to be helpful to ELF users, in that they aided them in correctly identifying the word(s) their partner was uttering. However, in some cases such cues were unhelpful, in that they led the listener in the wrong direction by supporting an incorrect interpretation of their partner’s pronunciation.
  • In the absence of co-textual and contextual cues, there seems to be a greater danger of misunderstanding. The few true misunderstandings in my data – i.e. instances where the listeners thought they had understood the word their partner was uttering when in fact they had not – all occurred in the control condition without schematic context. In each case, the reason the listener thought they had understood correctly seemed to be that there were no co-textual or contextual cues that would have led them to question their understanding – their interpretation of their partner’s pronunciation seemed accurate during the task. This suggests that a lack of co-text and context can be detrimental to communicative success in that it prevents ELF users from noticing a problem and, therefore, clarifying it. 

Possible implications for teaching

It goes without saying that the results of my research are tentative, as they are based on a very small number of participants. Far more research, not only of a qualitative but also of a quantitative nature, is needed before the exact implications for English language teaching regarding the interplay of co-text, context and pronunciation in ELF communication can be identified. Rather than giving definite recommendations for teaching, I would therefore like to provide an outlook for what such research might find, along with its possible implications:

  • Research might find that the presence of linguistic co-text and/or different forms of extra-linguistic context is indeed important for understanding another ELF user’s accent. If this is the case, learners might have to practice:
  1. producing sufficient co-text for their listeners to draw on;
  2. ‘triggering’ relevant schemata in their listeners (e.g. by using body language or by verbally creating associations)
  3. drawing their listeners’ attention to the physical context (again e.g. by using body language).

All of these strategies might help learners to resolve or prevent phonological intelligibility problems in ELF talk if they are unable to resolve or prevent them otherwise, e.g. by getting a particular sound right.

  • Possibly, certain contexts of real-life language use might be identified that maximize the risk of phonological intelligibility problems in ELF talk in contrast to those that minimize them. In this case, it will be important to raise learners’ awareness of the contexts in which they need to either pay particular attention to their pronunciation or employ the communication strategies mentioned above to prevent intelligibility problems.

However, as mentioned above, a lot more research is still needed to further explore and confirm (or not) the tendencies I observed in my study. I’m on it! So, watch this space!

[1] This ‘interactive’ view on processing speech has been supported by research findings in psycholinguistics (see e.g. Byrd & Mintz 2010: 162) and on the intelligibility of L2 speech (Zielinski 2006).

[2] These 2 pairs were selected from a pool of 5 pairs participating in this study, as they turned out to be fairly comparable in terms of certain extra-linguistic factors that have been found to affect intelligibility, such as familiarity with their partner’s accent and language attitudes (this information was obtained through a follow-up questionnaire). However, they were not comparable in terms of production, in that the strength of their L1 accent was different. It is therefore problematic to compare the 2 pairs directly to each other, which is why I decided to focus on comparing the 2 task conditions rather than the 2 pairs.


Brown, Adam. 1989. “Some thoughts on intelligibility”. The English Teacher XVIII. http://www.melta.org.my/ET/1989/main4.html (January 16, 2016).

Byrd, Dani; Mintz, Toben H. 2010. Discovering speech, words, and mind. Malden, Mass: Wiley-Blackwell.

Deterding, David. 2012. “Intelligibility in spoken ELF”. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca 1(1), 185–190.

Deterding, David. 2013. Misunderstandings in English as a Lingua Franca. Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton.

Jenkins, Jennifer. 2000. The phonology of English as an international language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Kaur, Jagdish. 2011. “Intercultural communication in English as a lingua franca”. Intercultural Pragmatics 8(1), 93–116.

Luchini, Pedro L.; Kennedy, Sara. 2013. “Exploring sources of phonological unintelligibility in spontaneous speech”. International Journal of English and Literature 4(3), 79–88.

Mauranen, Anna. 2006. “Signaling and preventing misunderstanding in English as lingua franca communication”. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 2006(177), 123–150.

Osimk, Ruth. 2009. “Decoding sounds”. Vienna English Working Papers 18(1), 64–89.

Pitzl, Marie-Luise. 2010. English as a lingua franca in international business. Saarbrücken: VDM Müller.

Zielinski, Beth. 2006. Reduced intelligibility in L2 speakers of English. Bundoora, Victoria.

About the author: Veronika Thir

Veronika Thir is a university assistant and PhD student at the English Department of the University of Vienna, where she obtained a teaching degree in English and French. During her studies, she has worked as a student tutor for practical English phonetics. While her MA thesis focused on the pedagogical implications of ELF research for teaching English pronunciation at university level (see also her article in VIEWS, 2016), her PhD project seeks to contribute to research on phonological intelligibility in ELF by exploring the interplay of pronunciation, co-text and context. She has also presented at various academic conferences.

ELFpron joins the the ELF11 conference committee


Last week saw the 10th Annual Conference of English as a Lingua Franca take place in Helsinki, Finland. Unfortunately, we weren’t able to attend this year, but we’re delighted to announce that for next year’s conference, Laura Patsko will be on the organizing committee!

The ELF11 Conference is due to take place in London, UK, in July 2018, and will be hosted by King’s College London. You’ll find more details on how to register on the ELF11 website – including information about the first ever Pre-conference Teachers’ Day.

At the ELF6 conference in 2013 – can you spot Laura? (Clue: second row, near the middle!)


The announcement at ELF10!


ELTons nomination: My English Voice


Every year, the British Council organizes and hosts the ELTons, an awards ceremony dedicated specifically to innovation in the field of English Language Teaching.

I’m thrilled to announce that in the 2017 ELTons, My English Voice is a finalist in the Innovation in Learner Resources category.

My English Voice is an incredible new resource for English language learners, created and run by my ELFpron co-blogger Katy Simpson. Its aim is to provide opportunities for learners to find their own voice in English, focusing on effective communication in international contexts.

Learners and teachers in the MEV community can:

raleway font logoIn short, this is English in the real world. My English Voice highlights the use of English as a lingua franca, with an emphasis on clear speech and effective listening skills. Learners get support in practising effective international communication, and teachers get support in bringing ELF pronunciation into their classrooms.

If you’d like to know more, Katy wrote a blogpost here about My English Voice when it launched last year. You can also:

Merely earning a spot among the finalists is a tremendous achievement. Huge congratulations to Katy and My English Voice for coming this far. Please join me in wishing them the best of luck at tomorrow’s ceremony.

— Laura Patsko, ELFpron co-founder



Pedagogy Pop-up: Everything you always wanted to know about teaching pronunciation* (*but were afraid to ask)


I work for a publisher and a key part of my role is to help our teams integrate research findings into ELT courses, materials, methods and approaches.

One of the challenges I face is how to make research interesting and engaging for the people who need or want to apply research to their daily practice. I find that many people who are not based in a very academic setting (like a university) hear the word “research” and immediately think that it will be boring, dry or esoteric, or that it will take them forever to read and understand a research publication. (And of course, sometimes it is like this, but it doesn’t have to be!)

So last summer, inspired by the innovative format of a 10-minute plenary presentation that I gave at a conference in Spain earlier that year, I decided to hold a series of mini-events to share key insights from applied linguistics research. I called these short presentations “Pedagogy Pop-ups”, and the principles were simple:

  • just 10 minutes long, easy to fit into a coffee break;
  • purpose is to share interesting insights from research and how they relate to our practice;
  • no audience participation required;
  • no slides.

There were five pop-ups in the series, of which three were video recorded. The first one, about teaching pronunciation, is now available to watch here (https://youtu.be/yyga6vIAroE):

While this pop-up isn’t “ELF” in name, it is ELF in nature! In other words, I don’t focus specifically on ELF, but my recommendations are informed by ELF principles.

Note that the original audience for this event was largely composed of ELT publishers and editors, so I make reference to materials and coursebooks, etc. – but everything here is relevant to teachers and trainers, too.

Enjoy, please share, and feel free to comment below!

P.S. I also mention in the pop-up that I can share a list of research and other publications that I referred to when compiling my script. Here they are:

Cauldwell, R. (2015). Listening Cherry 13 – Connected speech rules are too genteel. Published online at http://www.speechinaction.org/listening-cherry-13-connected-speech-rules-are-too-genteel/

Crawford, S. Z. & H. L. Moffie (2016). ‘Activities for teaching reduced speech’. TESOL Connections. Available online at http://newsmanager.commpartners.com/tesolc/downloads/features/2016/2016-06_reduced%20speech.pdf

Crystal, D. (2008). ‘Two thousand million?’ English Today, 93, Vol. 24, Issue 1, pp. 3-6.

Derwing, T. M. & M. J. Munro (2009). Putting accent in its place: Rethinking obstacles to communication. Language Teaching and Research, 42 (4), 476-490.

Graddol, D. (2006). English next: Why global English may mean the end of ‘English as a Foreign Language’. Published online by the British Council.

Jenkins, J. (2000). The phonology of English as an International Language: New models, new norms, new goals. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Levis, J. M., S. Sonsaat, S. Link & T. A. Barriuso (2016). Native and non-native teachers of L2 pronunciation: Effects on learner performance. TESOL Quarterly. Published online at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/tesq.272/pdf

Levis, J. & S. Sonsaat (2016). ‘Pronunciation materials’. In M. Azarnoosh et al (eds.), Issues in Materials Development, pp. 109-119. Published by Sense.

Munro, M. & T. Derwing. (1999).  Foreign accent, comprehensibility, and intelligibility in the speech of second language learners. Language Learning, 49 (supp. 1), pp. 285-310.

Saito, K. (2012). ‘Effects of instruction on L2 pronunciation development: A synthesis of 15 quasi-experimental intervention studies.’ TESOL Quarterly, 46/4, pp. 842-854.

Underhill, A. (2015). ‘Proprioception and pronunciation’. Speak Out! The newsletter of the IATEFL Pronunciation Special Interest Group, 53, pp. 25-34.

Walker, R. (2014). ‘Pronunciation Matters’. English Teaching Professional, 90. Available at https://englishglobalcom.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/pronunciation-matters-etp-90.pdf

Walker, R. (2014). ‘Pronunciation Matters’ (presentation slides). Available at https://englishglobalcom.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/pronunciation-matters.pdf

Walter, C. (2009). ‘Teaching phonology for reading comprehension’. Speak Out! The newsletter of the IATEFL Pronunciation Special Interest Group, 40.


Going to IATEFL 2017?


iatefl-glasgow-penantIt’s that time again… the IATEFL conference is fast approaching, and we’re looking forward to hearing what people have got to say about ELF and pronunciation.

To our surprise and disappointment, searching the conference programme for “English as a lingua franca” reveals only one session on this topic in the entire conference programme: the annual ELT Journal debate. And only one other session makes passing reference to ELF in its title or abstract: a short talk about native- and non-native speaker teachers and teacher training on Thursday afternoon. There are one or two other sessions which seem to relate to intelligibility, but nothing like last year’s conference offering.

On the bright side, there are a considerable number of sessions in this year’s conference which focus on pronunciation. If you choose to attend any of these, why not browse the ELFpron website beforehand so you can participate with a critical perspective? In our experience, attendees get more out of conference sessions if they have some critical and curious questions in mind.

For example, during pronunciation sessions you might ask yourself:

  • Are these activities useful for focusing on areas within the Lingua Franca Core?
  • Would my students need to focus on these areas of pronunciation, or are they more suitable for learners aiming for native-like pronunciation?
  • What assumptions are made about what is “intelligible”? What are these based on?

Without further ado, here is our selection of this year’s sessions which appear to focus on ELF and/or pronunciation, including ELFpron’s own Laura Patsko, whose workshop will take place on the Wednesday afternoon (details below). Do come and say hello in person if you’re at the conference!

Monday 3 April

ALL DAY – PronSIG Pre-Conference Event: “Pronunciation then and now”

This day won’t focus specifically on ELF, but it’s bound to be mentioned as the focus of the day is a review of historical methods, techniques, trends and topics related to pronunciation teaching. We’ll also be celebrating the 100th anniversary of Daniel Jones’ English Pronouncing Dictionary.

Tuesday 4 April

10:40-11:25 – Adrian Underhill (Forth) – Getting pronunciation out of the head and into the body

Adrian will presumably be working his usual magic, entertaining and informing the audience with his techniques for raising learners’ awareness of the fact that pronunciation is fundamentally a physical skill. Worth attending if you’ve never been to one of his workshops.

12:00-13:05 – ELTj debate, featuring Péter Medgyes and Alessia Cogo (Clyde) – ELF is interesting for researchers, but not important for teachers and learners

We wouldn’t miss this session for the world. Alessia Cogo is one of the foremost published researchers on ELF and pedagogy, not to mention a great presenter and always keen to meet and talk to teachers at conferences (unlike some academics!). It’s really worth going to listen to what she has to say. Péter Medgyes is also a big name in the whole ‘native/non-native speaker teacher’ debate, and caused a stir back in 2014 when he referred to ELF as merely a “trendy concept” in his IATEFL e-bulletin. He stepped down as IATEFL Vice President/President-Elect shortly afterwards. (Click here to read about the pair of articles which prompted his comment.)

15:20-15:50 – Mark McKinnon & Nicola Meldrum (Alsh 2) – Making pronunciation an integral part of your classroom practice

We often talk about the importance of integrating pronunciation into all lessons throughout a course. This session looks likely to focus on this, and we’re excited to see what suggestions they have for classroom practice. The abstract reads: How much pronunciation work takes place in the average EFL classroom? Many teachers would admit that a lot less goes on than they would like. It makes sense that without sufficient mastery of pronunciation, being understood and understanding others is virtually impossible. In this talk, we will cover practical ideas on how to fully integrate pronunciation into your classroom work.

Wednesday 5 April

This day of the conference has a dedicated stream of sessions related to the Pronunciation Special Interest Group (“PronSIG”), so if you’re a pronunciation enthusiast, you could just stay in room “Boisdale 1” all day and you’d probably be quite content!

10:20-10:50 – Mark Hancock (Boisdale 1) – Accent: are we bovvered?

Regular readers of this blog will know that we find accents fascinating. There is such a diverse range of English accents in the world today and it’s not only possible but necessary to address this in the classroom. Laura gave a practical workshop on this topic at the 2015 IATEFL conference and it looks like Mark is going to cover some of the theory behind such an approach in his session this year.

Mark’s abstract reads: Accent can be a problem in English teaching. Which accent do we take as a model? Must it be a native-speaker accent? Must it be a prestige accent? In this session, we will look at how accents vary, both across the UK and in the wider world, and examine some of the implications for English language teaching.

12:25-12:55 – Sarah Grech (Boisdale 1) – Owning English: honing learners’ chances of intelligibility internationally

Here’s one of the few talks in this year’s programme that looks like it might address ELF, even if it doesn’t specify this in the abstract:

This talk explores how far fossilised pronunciation patterns can be challenged in a class of young adults aspiring to use spoken English internationally. It also shows how trained language experts rationalise their notions of intelligibility when listening to learners attempting to accommodate international interlocutors. Practical implications are considered with respect to multilingual contexts.

14:15-15:00 – Laura Patsko (Boisdale 1) – How to give feedback on learners’ pronunciation

ELFpron’s own Laura Patsko is giving this workshop. There is a lot of good advice available nowadays for how to teach pronunciation, including (we like to think) on this blog! But attention is usually focused on introducing or practising certain features, and many teachers are left wondering: how do I then respond to what my students produce? In this workshop, attendees will look at some practical tips and techniques which teachers can use to give feedback on their students’ pronunciation. Naturally, we’ll be taking an ELF perspective when considering what aspects of pronunciation to prioritise.

15:15-15:45 – Adam Scott (Boisdale 1) – Achieving phonology’s potential in the ELT classroom

Adam probably won’t be focusing on ELF, but he’s certainly an engaging speaker and author and it’s well worth attending his session in order to benefit from the reflected glow of his creative ideas for teaching pronunciation!

Here’s his abstract: Phonology is central to language, and the ultimate noticing activity for learners. It has many uses in reading and writing in addition to speaking and listening, but materials, teachers and students undervalue its systemic importance, ignoring its learning potential. This presentation outlines how sound phonological awareness informs wider language development, and offers practical adaptations to CLT that place phonology centre-stage.

16:20-17:05 – Louise Guyett (Boisdale 1) – Designing personalised pronunciation board games for your learners

A PronSIG committee member, Louise is another pron enthusiast and has a particular interest in materials creation. In her practical workshop, she’s going to focus on board games – how to adapt them for pronunciation practice and how to decide what learners need to focus on.

17:20-17:50 – Ewa Wanat & Rachel Smith (Boisdale 1) – Rhythm matters? Rhythmic training techniques for comprehending connected speech

Another session in this year’s programme which doesn’t mention ELF, but which may be relevant. The abstract focuses on comprehension – how to understand connected speech, rather than how to produce it (which many native-oriented approaches would prioritise). We’ll be interested to see what techniques and tips they suggest!

Thursday 6 April

12:00-12:30 – John Field (Argyll 1) – Listening: ways out of the fog

John is an expert in second-language listening and you may be familiar with his view that we should move away from traditional/popular notions of ‘listening for gist’, ‘listening for detail’, etc. in favour of approaches that deal more directly and usefully with the real business of listening – i.e. decoding the stream of speech that we hear. We’re looking forward to hearing his suggestions for identifying English learners’ particular difficulties with listening.

14:00-14:30 – Karin Krummenacher, Daniel Baines & Marek Kiczkowiak (Carron 2) – NESTs and NNESTs: awareness-raising and promoting equality through teacher training

Although the abstract for this session makes passing reference to ELF, it appears to focus more on the problems of native-speakerism within ELT. It’s likely that participants will come away with some ideas for addressing the issues of diversity, identity and accent variation in teacher training courses.

14:00-14:30 – Gemma Archer (Alsh 1) – The other 97%: pronunciation strategies for non-RP-speaking teachers

Gemma is from Scotland and – like most ELT practitioners – does not speak with an accent that is reflected in most ELT materials, either as a model or an example. Her abstract reads: For many years, the dominant pronunciation model in UK teaching resources has been Received Pronunciation, despite the estimation that RP speakers only account for 3% of the population (Crystal, 1983). This talk will focus on both the phonological and pedagogical problems this may pose to the remaining 97% of regional teachers, and share supportive strategies to aid their pronunciation instruction.

14:35-15:05 – Pamela Rogerson-Revell (Alsh 1) – Research into practice: revisiting some more ‘old-fashioned’ notions in pronunciation

We wonder if Pamela will touch on ELF in her talk. Her abstract reads: […] I would like to [discuss] some more old-fashioned or well-established notions in pronunciation. In this talk, I will argue that there is still a need for closer links between phonological research and pronunciation teaching.

16:45-17:15 – Richard Cauldwell (Barra/Jura) – A syllabus for listening: less top-down! More bottom-up

Richard is well-known for making the messy business of listening to authentic speech more accessible to learners. In this session, he’ll talk about how we can help learners “decode the sound substance of recordings”, truly teaching them to listen, as opposed to merely testing what they managed to understand.

Friday 7 April

09:00-10:00 – Jane Setter (Clyde) – PLENARY: Where angels fear to tread: intonation in English language teaching

There could be no better start to the last day of the conference than Professor Jane Setter giving the morning plenary. Some 15 years ago, Laura was lucky enough to be taught by Jane on her undergraduate degree in linguistics, and it’s no coincidence that her specialist subject is now the same as Jane’s. Jane’s expertise, enthusiasm and guidance has strongly influenced Laura’s career and research in English linguistics. We wouldn’t miss her plenary for the world.

(Note: A follow-up Q&A session with Jane will take place in Alsh 1 from 11:05-11:35, if you’d like to discuss intonation in ELT or any aspect of second language phonology, phonology in global Englishes, and pronunciation teaching and learning.)

10:20-10:50 – Catarina Pontes (Carron 1) – Using e-portfolios to develop pronunciation teaching via an awareness-raising framework

One of the most important aspects of developing pronunciation skills is to be self-aware. In this session, Catarina will use her experience of e-portfolios to demonstrate how teachers can develop awareness of their own pronunciation and the influence this has on the quality of their teaching.


Interview with Prof. Jennifer Jenkins


We were thrilled to have the opportunity to catch up with Professor Jennifer Jenkins at the University of Southampton recently, as she inspired so much of our work at ELFpron. It’s 16 years since Prof. Jenkins published  her research leading to the creation of the Lingua Franca Core (LFC) so we decided it was time to ask her what she is researching now, and how her earlier work on pronunciation helped to inform her current work on multilingualism.

We hope this video might be a useful introduction for the teaching training classroom and anyone interested in better understanding ELF. If you are a fan of video content, check out our new page linking to all the ELFpron training videos, available to watch for free.

Many thanks to Prof. Jenkins for her time and continued support.